Neville's quartz-to-Buddha vision
Neville described a 1934 vision of his perfected individualized self appearing as a quartz-to-Buddha transformation, later recounted in multiple lectures including Five Lessons (1948).
Person: Neville Goddard
Date (happened)
-
-
-
-
between 1930 and 1939
stated
Source
"Back in the thirties", told in Test Yourself (nid 1921)
Many years ago
relative · probable
1934
stated
Reasoning
The passage recounts this exact quartz-fragmentation and meditating-self vision and explicitly states that it occurred in 1934; that year dates this event, not the lecture telling.
1934
stated · probable
Reasoning
Neville directly and emphatically states the year of the vision ('1934 to be exact'); a specific stated year, but a decades-later, uncorroborated self-report, so probable rather than certain.
Show all 20 claims
1934
stated
Reasoning
Passage 530580 (lecture nid=1112, position 25): 'I had mine in 1934. I didn't understand it. I have had visions all through my life. I didn't understand them but I recorded them.' Neville stating the year of his own rock vision directly, in first person, unhedged -- not computed or anchored, a plain stated fact matching the event's title. A second passage in the same lecture, 530560 (position 5), independently restates the same fact: 'Mine happened in 1934, what I've just told you.' Both reverse-witness linkages are confidence=certain, which per lane rule covers the linkage only (that these passages are genuinely about this event), not the date's own reliability -- assessed separately here: the source is Neville himself, the person to whom it happened, naming the same year twice with no hedge, so confidence=certain stands on the statement's own merits. This upgrades the existing title-derived claim (d0, probable, since a title is a derived artefact, not independent evidence) to a witnessed claim; d0 is left untouched, append-only.
1936
stated
Reasoning
Neville states the year of the vision directly and plainly ('It was in the year 1936'), matching the event's existing title.
1934
stated
Source
passage 552153 (lecture nid 2041), 'In 1934, while sitting quietly not thinking of anything in particular, I closed my eyes...'
Reasoning
Neville states the year of the vision directly and without hedging in his own first-person account; this is the actual textual evidence the earlier title-derived claim (d0, probable) was a placeholder for, and it stands at certain confidence.
1936
stated · probable
Why
This is the same lifetime vision recounted at least a dozen times across the corpus (nid 109, 1112, 1142, 1216, 1246, 1408, 1516, 1838, 1868, 1882, 2053); most are already gathered under hist_event:789 -- see merge_proposal.
Reasoning
This event's own witness only says 'Back in the thirties'; a separate telling of the identical vision (same imagery: quartz fragments, reassembles into a lotus-seated figure of himself, glows, explodes) states the year explicitly as 1936, which is consistent with and narrows 'the thirties'.
1936
stated · probable
Source
derived from the event's own title: "Neville's 1936 quartz-rock vision"
Reasoning
The event held NO date claim of any kind; its own title states 1936 (year precision, parsed as "year only"). ⚠ A title in this corpus is a DERIVED artefact — an earlier pass wrote it from the passage text — so this claim is title-derived and is marked as such rather than cited as a source document; the underlying text remains the real evidence and would supersede it. Confidence `probable`, never `certain`, for that reason. Precision is never inflated beyond the title's own wording. CALIBRATION (run v1.1/l1.4/titledate, against the 489 events that already hold an independent preferred date): day 96.1%, month 94.1% agreement. Titles naming a REFERENCE event rather than the event itself ("before", "after", "during the week of", "per ... lecture") are refused outright and never reach this write — reading an anchor as the date is the same laundering phase3b committed when it wrote telling dates onto events.
1936
stated
Reasoning
Neville explicitly dates his own vision to 1936. The passage is direct first-person evidence for the happening year; it does not establish a month or day.
before 1969
bound · possible
Source
qualifying source passages 531358; telling lecture nids 1142
Reasoning
Qualifying passage ids [531358] belong to telling lecture nids [1142]. Each listed lecture contributes the selected safe envelope year 1969 (MAX of its non-refuted delivery years); 1969 is the MIN across telling lectures.
before 27 January 1969
bound
Source
telling lecture nid 1142, certain delivery 1969-01-27
Why
Tightens the phase4 L6a envelope from before 1969 to before 1969-01-27.
Reasoning
L6a envelope tightened to the telling day of nid 1142 (certain delivery 1969-01-27); same premise, finer precision. The phase4 L6a bound on this event is `before 1969`, an envelope over delivery YEARS computed without reading text. Its premise is that the fact is true by the time it is told; on that same premise the DAY of the telling is a strictly better upper bound. Nothing is re-decided — the bound is stated to the precision the evidence always supported. The delivery claim for 1969-01-27 on nid 1142 is held at `certain` by the corpus, which is what carries this claim. #2274; the L6a row stands beside this one.
before 1963
bound · possible
Reasoning
Qualifying passage ids [546488] belong to telling lecture nids [1843]. Each listed lecture contributes the selected safe envelope year 1963 (MAX of its non-refuted delivery years); 1963 is the MIN across telling lectures.
before 19 April 1963
bound
Why
Tightens the phase4 L6a envelope from before 1963 to before 1963-04-19.
Reasoning
L6a envelope tightened to the telling day of nid 1843 (certain delivery 1963-04-19); same premise, finer precision. The phase4 L6a bound on this event is `before 1963`, an envelope over delivery YEARS computed without reading text. Its premise is that the fact is true by the time it is told; on that same premise the DAY of the telling is a strictly better upper bound. Nothing is re-decided — the bound is stated to the precision the evidence always supported. The delivery claim for 1963-04-19 on nid 1843 is held at `certain` by the corpus, which is what carries this claim. #2274; the L6a row stands beside this one.
c. 1934
estimated · probable
Why
M7 dating pass (529; 525's readers, packet 004)
Reasoning
Matches event 789 'Neville's quartz-to-Buddha vision', 1934, New York City (flint/quartz turned into a meditating Buddha that is himself). The passage adds only that he was reading The Life of Buddha 'when this first happened'.
c. 1926
stated · refuted
Why
pm-actor-525: refuted by the M7 dating pass (529; 525's readers, packet 006): An imprecise 'must have been thirty-seven years' recollection that fits neither the well-corroborated 1934 nor 1936 cluster of direct tellings.
Told / reported
1948
stated · probable · preferred
-
-
-
-
25 September 1967
stated
Source
Test Yourself (nid 1921), telling 1921-4, told 1967-09-25
29 October 1965
estimated
Why
Lane L7 (#2354) re-derivation. Supersedes in substance, not in storage, the refuted-date told claim(s) on this event; those rows stand per append-only.
Reasoning
Re-derived, not walked down. The existing told claim(s) on this event took their date from a delivery claim on node 1216 that the corpus has since REFUTED, so the corpus was asserting that Neville told this on a day it separately says he did not lecture. That is a contradiction rather than an over-confidence, and lowering the confidence would have hidden it instead of resolving it. The refutation stands and the told claim is the wrong side of it. Node 1216 surviving (non-refuted) claim: 1965-10-29 at `certain`. All claims on the node: 1965-10-29 certain; 1969-9-26 refuted; 1965-10-29 certain (preferred). Superseded here: delta 5: 1969-09-26 at `certain` (run `corpus v1 / phase3b`). The telling is dated by its lecture, so with the refuted date removed from consideration the surviving claim is what the telling inherits, at that claim own confidence and no higher.
21 May 1963
estimated
Why
Lane L7 (#2354) re-derivation. Supersedes in substance, not in storage, the refuted-date told claim(s) on this event; those rows stand per append-only.
Reasoning
Re-derived, not walked down. The existing told claim(s) on this event took their date from a delivery claim on node 1108 that the corpus has since REFUTED, so the corpus was asserting that Neville told this on a day it separately says he did not lecture. That is a contradiction rather than an over-confidence, and lowering the confidence would have hidden it instead of resolving it. The refutation stands and the told claim is the wrong side of it. Node 1108 surviving (non-refuted) claim: 1963-5-21 at `certain`. All claims on the node: 1963-5-21 certain; 1964-3-6 refuted; 1963-5-21 certain (preferred). Superseded here: delta 2: 1964-03-06 at `certain` (run `corpus v1 / phase3b`). The telling is dated by its lecture, so with the refuted date removed from consideration the surviving claim is what the telling inherits, at that claim own confidence and no higher.
Show all 19 claims
14 November 1963
estimated
Reasoning
Two independent certain sources agree exactly, and no competing claim exists.
29 October 1965
stated
Reasoning
The lecture 'Your Creative Power' has two independently agreeing certain sources for 1965-10-29. The competing 1969-09-26 claim has already been downgraded to doubtful at the lecture level (it belongs to no node in the corpus and cannot be confirmed as this transcript's delivery), yet hist_event:789's existing field_told list for this same telling uses that doubtful 1969-09-26 value instead of this certain one.
22 March 1968
estimated · probable
Why
Flag for delivery-date review: lecture nid 1285 has two DIFFERENT legacy catalog entries (#367 and #424) both marked preferred=1 with different dates six months apart — a data-integrity issue on the delivery-claim side that this event write does not resolve, only works around.
Reasoning
Not a symmetric tie: two independent sources (a second legacy catalog entry AND a separate chrome-dateline harvest of this exact page) agree on 1968-03-22, against a single, uncorroborated catalog claim of 1967-09-29. Per the same logic as L4 trap-3 (prefer the better-evidenced claim, name the conflict), field_told rests on the doubly-corroborated 1968-03-22 rather than a between-range spanning both years. Confidence held at probable rather than certain because two catalog numbers both carrying preferred=1 on the same node is itself unresolved and flagged below for the delivery-date lane.
19 February 1969
estimated
Source
delivery claim d1 on lecture nid 2041, 1969-02-19, stated, certain, preferred (chrome site-nav header)
Reasoning
The vision is narrated within 'The Rock', whose certain, document-native delivery date is 1969-02-19; the competing internal-evidence estimate (d0, Jan-Aug 1968) was refuted by L7 adjudication (#2363) and cannot be derived from.
12 December 1969
estimated · probable
Reasoning
Passage 552357, within the lecture 'Mystery Life' (node 2050), has Neville narrate 'the fragmented Rock that I saw back in 1934' -- this is Neville telling the vision story to his audience during that lecture. The lecture's delivery date, 1969-12-12, rests on a single, unreviewed legacy-catalog claim (#1003) with no independent corroboration, so probable rather than certain. || v1.1 type repair: written as `stated` by run v1.1/l4/actor417/8000-9999-b14, retyped `estimated` — the claim cites node 2050, not a passage, so it is this lane's inference rather than something Neville said in so many words (#2117).
25 September 1967
stated · probable
Reasoning
He retells the quartz vision from the platform in this lecture, whose only delivery claim, read verbatim from the source document's dateline, is graded probable.
27 January 1969
stated
Source
The Mystery of Inspiration (nid 1142), telling 1142-1, told 1969-01-27
27 January 1969
estimated
Source
preferred delivery claim on lecture nid 1142
Why
Retypes the derived telling as estimated; prior stated row remains.
Reasoning
Passage 531358 is in lecture 1142; two catalogue rows agree on 1969-01-27, while the competing 1964 claim is refuted.
-
6 March 1964
stated · refuted
Reasoning
|| v1.1/l7/told-close: the delivery claim this was derived from (nid 1108, 1964-3-6) was refuted by the L7 adjudication (#2363). The corrected told claim from the same lecture stands at 1963-5-21. This row is retired rather than deleted so the derivation history remains readable.
26 September 1969
stated · refuted
Reasoning
|| v1.1/l7/told-close: the delivery claim this was derived from (nid 1216, 1969-9-26) was refuted by the L7 adjudication (#2363). The corrected told claim from the same lecture stands at 1965-10-29. This row is retired rather than deleted so the derivation history remains readable.
Sources
Source
- Ancient Tantra Sir John Woodroffe The Translator Abdullah The Synthesizer Neville Goddard The Applier ¶38 ("Describes the 1934 quartz-to-Buddha vision of his perfected individualized self")
- The Rock ¶3 (All I was looking at was simply this light, when suddenly before my vision appeared this quartz…about that size…this solid, solid rock, but it’s a quartz. And then before you could think, it fragments, broken into numberless little pieces, and then just …)
- Our Real Beliefs Are What We Live By ¶27 (Many years ago, it must have been thirty-seven years ago, I sat in the Silence, and there I was lost in contemplation; and then before my vision, my inner eye, appeared a huge rock, a flint.)
- Call the Next Witness ¶43 (I saw this when I came upon myself in deep meditation, profound meditation, a glowing being like a Buddha in the lotus posture. I looked at it and I was amazed to see myself in this profound state.)
- You Are My Witnesses ¶3 (Well, one day, sitting in the Silence, thinking of nothing in particular, turning my attention inwards, as always happens with me, all the dark caverns of the brain began to grow luminous. As they grew luminous, suddenly before my eyes came the rock, a q…)
- Your Creative Power ¶62 (Like the story…once turning my attention on the inside, thinking of nothing in particular, and my head becomes a golden, golden light…pulsing golden liquid light and suddenly before my eyes came a quartz about this big, solid quartz.)
- The Congregation of God ¶31 (I saw that so clearly one night when I saw this quartz smashed, fragmented. Then quickly all the little fragments were gathered together into a form, and the form was that of a meditating Buddha. Here was this being sitting in a lotus posture. As I looke…)
- States Meditating Being ¶16 (Sitting in the Silence, suddenly before my vision comes a rock, a huge quartz, and this quartz now fragments itself, divides itself. As I’m looking at it, it reassembles itself into a man, and that man is seated in the lotus posture, in deep, deep medita…)
- Test Yourself Realneville ¶19 (Back in the thirties, sitting in the Silence, not thinking of anything in particular, here I am, just with my eyes closed in contemplation, and suddenly before my eyes comes this quartz, a huge rock, just one solid rock.)
- Trust Imagination ¶1 (Many years ago, sitting in the silence, thinking of nothing in particular, my eyes closed in contemplation, but not really thinking of any one particular thing, suddenly a stone appeared before my eyes, about that size, huge quartz.)
- The Mystery of Inspiration ¶8 (Well, I saw myself begotten out of a rock. I looked at this rock, the whole thing is fragmented, it gathers itself together, and here is a person seated in this wonderful lotus posture.)
- States Meditating Being ¶16 (States Meditating Being (nid 1882) -- a separate telling of the same vision that explicitly dates it: 'The year was 1936')
- Living Water ¶21 (As I came closer and looked at it, I was looking at myself. I was the thing that I’m contemplating.)
Temporal reference